Hacker News Reader

Comment by dragonwriter | Hacker News Reader

The US can make cellphones, its just not efficient for the US to make cellphones because the US’s comparative advantage is elsewhere.

What it would take for the US to make cellphones is direct subsidy to the (inefficient, and for that reason likely therefore doomed by the market without artificial support, since there is robust competition) US firms doing so.

Of course, not only would this cost the amount of the subsidy, but the amount of the lost opportunities in places where the US has comparative advantages foregone to provide the subsidy.

The question then is why would you want to do this?

View on HN

Producing real things is not just a matter of money. You need know-how and supply chains. These things left the US at least 10 years ago. It can get them back, but the costs will be staggering, and it would need to compete against China and other Asian countries.

Many of those Asian countries are our allies. If you want to argue for weapon or dual use stuff like drones that's one thing but I don't see how making cellphones help. Also we do make real things both physical and non physical

I think you're deceiving yourself. They're allies as long as it makes sense for them.

As the last 15 years has shown, being ally only works until US decides to choose themselves first. Even weird comments about Canada’s independence can sway population’s perception. There are genuine conversations about “maybe we shouldn’t have severed our ties with China” on the ground nowadays.

>> The US can't even make cell phones any more.

>> What would it take to get that capability back?

> The question then is why would you want to do this?

National security, obviously. Cell phones are a critical modern communication device, and whoever though it was a good idea to outsource that kind of thing political and economic rival was an idiot.

There's all kinds of accounts of past CIA/NSA daring-do where they used US-manufactured products to subvert rivals, and now we're going to get to be on the other end of that kind of thing.

Then there's the adding factor of it being kind of a good idea to have significant manufacturing capacity for the full-range of modern products located domestically or with allies in case the geopolitical SHTF.

You know, all that important stuff the market doesn't give a shit about, because it's a limited and imperfect system.

It's not economically optimal for one country to manufacture all the jewelry and its neighbour all the tanks, because this situation quickly becomes one country

> because this situation quickly becomes one country

i would argue this to be a good thing - a global "country". And yet, it is the human condition to separate tribally. It's why civilization can't advance more, until this becomes solved.

good thing we have more than two countries. in history, the jewelers generally tend to win because they just pay off some other tank building country - see Kuwait, for instance

>its just not efficient

The problem is we don't need efficiency, we need effectivity.

>The question then is why would you want to do this?

Because He Who Makes Leads The World. You can't and won't lead if you don't actually get your hands dirty and make shit. China is the world leading superpower now because they make everyone's shit, we are all beholden to them.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com